Given the facts that there are 7,000 grains to a pound, and a good-sized fox squirrel (the largest tree squirrel in North America, per Wikipedia) weighs around 2 pounds or 14,000 grains:An 8.4 grain Air Arms Field pellet is .0006 of the mass of a 2-pound squirrel. (8.4/14,000 = .0006)I am a 200-pound man, or about 100 times the mass of that big squirrel. Therefore, a projectile that weighs .0006 of my mass hitting mewould weigh 840 grains (8.4 x 100). That's bigger than a .50 BMG (647-800 grains) and almost as big as a .600 Nitro Express (900 grains), which is a highly specialized, very rare, and very expensive elephant cartridge! It's frankly horrifying to imagine what a .50 BMG would do tome if I took one through the ribs, even if it was flying at typical airgun pellet velocity.If this is so, then why do so many people consider .22 or even .25 to be the smallest viable caliber for hunting small game (squirrels,rabbits, and similar)? By "so many people" I mean Tom Gaylord and others who write things for Pyramyd, or other recommendations you can find at Airgun Depot, straightshooters.com, or crosman.com. In no way am I trying to pick a fight with anyone here on GTA over this. Hasanyone else thought this through?I realize that I don't have fur (for which my wife sighs in relief), a really thick hide, or big, hard muscles like a tree rat. I also realize that the ballistic coefficient of a .22 or .25 will help when ranges get really long (50+ yards). There is certainly a place for the bigger pellets. But for the ranges at which the vast majority of critters like this are shot, why isn't .177 enough? Is there something I have missed? HA